Also the plaintiffs brought a flawed constitutionality claim, because they don't signal a provision in the law that makes the FHFA unconstitutional. The Scotus-appointed amicus said that the FHFA-C is constitutional because it has limited powers. But using his same arguments, the FHFA-R is unconstitutional, because it has "coercive power" in the director's duty: "the activities of FnF must be consistent with the Public Interest."